Weakness of Analogy
Summary:
One objection to the argument just set forth is that it relies on a weak analogy, it takes for granted that there is a significant resemblance between natural objects and objects which we know to have been designed but is this obviously the case?
Arguments from analogy rely on there being a strong similarity between the two things being compared. For example, a wrist watch and a pocket watch are sufficiently similar for us to be able to assume that they were both designed by watchmakers. They both consist of similar parts, working together in a similar way, producing the same outcome.
But if the similarity is weak, then the conclusions that can be drawn, on the basis of the comparison, is going to be correspondingly weak.
Although there is some similarity between a watch and an eye - they are both intricate and fulfil their particular function, it is only a vague similarity - They are not made up of similar components, they do not work in a similar way and they do not produce the same outcome.
So any conclusions based on the analogy will, as a result, be correspondingly vague.
There are other criticisms of this argument to.
